Reconsider Bobby
See original GitHub issueCurseForge link
https://www.curseforge.com/minecraft/mc-mods/bobby
CurseForge Mod Distribution
Allowed
Modrinth link
https://modrinth.com/mod/bobby
Source/other link
https://github.com/Johni0702/bobby
What it does
Bobby is a Minecraft mod which allows for render distances greater than the server’s view-distance setting. It accomplishes this goal by recording and storing (in .minecraft/.bobby
) all chunks sent by the server which it then can load and display at a later point when the chunk is outside the server’s view-distance. (Credit: NebelNidas via #46)
Why should it be in the modpack
Comparing to FarSight, Bobby is:
- Open Source
- On Modrinth
- More customizable
- Providing OF parity by supporting 32+ render distances
Why shouldn’t it be in the modpack
FarSight was voted as a mod better than Bobby
Categories
Replaces an existing mod, Works like OptiFine
Additional details
On the public vote made in the past, the only thing the FO community was asked to vote about is performance. Since the beta version which included for the last time Bobby, more performance optimizations have been added, via Debugify and other mods too. Also, the mod’s configuration allows you to disable the chunk caching. Fabulously Optimized aims on OptiFine parity and 32+ render distance is another feature FarSight does not cover. To sum up, I see no point for Bobby not to be in the modpack. Please don’t forget that I had voted for FarSight too (The link is from the Discord Server). See also #46, the original issue.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created a year ago
- Comments:19 (8 by maintainers)
Top GitHub Comments
Yes, i totally agree with that, if it doesn’t decrease performance. If at one point i find in my testing that bobby surpass farsight, i’ll directly use it for myself and give the results here.
The thing about Bobby is that you can say how long it should keep the chunks saved. If it’s said something like 5 days for example, it would delete the data from the chunks you haven’t being in a while, all while keeping the ones you see more often. That essentially means that the size won’t be creeping up that much.
In my view, anyway, it’s better to have a feature but don’t want to use them, then to want a feature that isn’t there.